Pre-conference Workshops
Topic One─Conducting Governmental and Nonprofit Accounting Research:
Policy Implications at Federal, State, and Local Government Levels
Speaker: James R. DalkinJames R. Dalkin is a Director in the Financial Management and Assurance Team with the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). He also serves as a member of the AICPA’s Auditing Standards Board and as an observer on the COSO Advisory Board. Mr. Dalkin has responsibility for directing GAO’s work to develop and maintain government auditing standards (the Yellow Book);
internal control standards for the federal government (the Green Book); and, GAO’s work with the accounting and auditing profession. He is also responsible for the audits of the Securities Exchange Commission and the Statements of Social Insurance included in the consolidated financial report of the United States.
Description:
The workshop included discussion and resources to help governmental and nonprofit (GNP) accounting researchers. It was a policy maker's perspective on governmental and nonprofit accounting research. The session included a discussion of where we can do better as academics in contributing to the public policy debate about various governmental/nonprofit topics.
Topic Two─
Speaker: Terry Patton
Terry Patton is the Research Manager at the Government Accounting Standards Board(GASB). He was part of the project team for GASB Statement No.34, Basic Financial Statements─and Management’s Discussion and Analysis
─for State and Local Governments. Previously, he was an Assistant Professor of Accounting at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh and supervisor at a Texas CPA firm where he conducted audits of local governments. Mr. Patton received his doctorate in accounting from Texas Tech University.
Day 1
Topic One─The Future of Higher Education Speaker: Jeffery Selingo
2
Jeffery Selingo, an author, reporter, columnist, and leading authority on higher education, has spent his journalism career covering colleges and
universities worldwide. His new book, College (Un)Bound: The Future of Higher
Education and What It Means for Students, explores the college of the future─
how families will pay, what campuses will look like, and how students will learn and prove their value in the job market. Mr. Selingo is editor at large of The
Chronicle of Higher Education and a senior fellow at Education Sector, an
independent education think tank in Washington, DC.Description:
The speaker pointed out that there is a disconnection between how students need and how university is teaching. About 33% students transfer before graduation and almost 400,000 college students drop out. In 2008, housing crisis planted the seeds of crisis in higher education in the following 5-10 years. 2001-2010 a lost decade of higher education college tuition reaching in 2010 almost 37% of family income. Colorado will reach zero budget for higher education by 2030. For journalists, 3 anecdotes constitute a trend. Also, parents would ask “ Is a college still of value?”. 20% will be full-time self-paying students.
Each institution needs to ask what we are good at. Students will have one admission and multiple college experience mixing physical courses and cyber courses. The speaker also ask” What happens to the traditional campus
experience?. Our education is a commodity product or the innovation product.
Topic Two─Curricula and Pedagogies for Future Accounting
Profession(Pathways Commission)
Moderator: Gail Hoover King, Purdue University Calumet
Panelists : Cathleen S. Burns, Creative Action Learning Solution LLC George Krull, Pathways Commission Co-Sponsor
Jack Wilkerson, Wake Forest University Susan Wolcott, WolcottLynch
Description:
Professional judgment model
Do curricula mapping & coordination
Clinical experience =\= internship
1. Content knowledge 2. Technology knowledge 3. Pedagogy knowledge
3
Day 2
Topic One─ The Future of Academic Research
Speakers: Gregg Gordon, President and CEO of the SSRN
Judy Luther, President of Informed Strategies and past President of Society for Scholary Publishing
Michael Jenson, Presidential Scholar and co-founder of Financial Economics Network
Description:
Digital science tools, including figshare, readcube, and Altmetric.
NSF-Merit Criteria; Publications→Products, including publications, data sets, software, patents, and copyrights.
University productivity includes publications, citation to journal articles, research funding, and honorific awards.
Relevance of research→How is demonstrated? Faculty? University?
Profession? Society?
Topic Two - The Future of Research─Plenary Follow-up Session Moderators: Marry Barth, AAA President-Elect
Panelists: Mark L. Defond, University of Southern California Gregg Gordon, SSRN
Michael Jenson, AAA presidential Scholar Judy Luther, Informed Strategies
Julie Smith David, AAA Chief Innovation Officer Shyam Sunder, Yale University
Description:
How to get accounting literature blended into the bid flow of social scholarly research?
SS Impact factors are damaging scholarly research. The assessment should be based on reading by colleagues, not simple impact factors.
Day 3
Topic One ─ Publications Ethics: Working Together to Develop Our Norms,
Policies, and Precedures.
Moderators: Shristine A. Botoson, the University of Utah Panelists: Judy Lutherr, Informed Strategies
4
Terry Shevlin, University of California, Irvine Mary Stone, the University of Alabama
Description:
Increase in retractions in recent years especially significant in medical and life science areas.
Plagiarism & data fabrication issues are getting noticed.
Mind your publication ethics
“Retraction Watch” blog
Academy of Management preventing by Ethics Video (8 series)
Committee on publication ethics→Best practice! (COPE)
Council of science editors white paper
“iAuthenticate” used by AAA staff
“Cross Mark”- indentifies the most updated version (AAA action)
Started with a “plagiarism policy” reviewed by publication committee (AAA action)
All papers are reviewed by “Cross Check” (AAA action)
An editor: Steal of an idea; private data check; deliver by due dates of reviewers
A reviewer: bring the positive points out first.
Policy in writing in US litigious environment. For example, AAA has guidelines, work flows, and enforcements.
Data fabrication→requiring data submitted with paper submission?
reproduce requirements?